[REBOL] Re: FTP access via a port spec
From: laurent:giroud:libertysurf at: 4-Oct-2002 22:44
Hi Scott,
> << - would anyone know why does Rebol maintains an opened port despite the
> fact
> that the 'read is over ? >>
> If you open a port, it's up to you to close it. If you just use READ on a
> scheme, then REBOL can do it all for you.
I agree that it should do it, but it looks like it doesn't.
The code below does not explicitely open a port since as you say it simply reads
on a scheme, however when looking at my firewall status window it shows that
port 21 is kept open by rebol.
tiftp: [scheme: 'FTP host: "ftp.host.com" port-id: 21
user: "username" pass: "userpass" target: %index.php3]
print read tiftp
But couldn't it be a bug in the ftp protocol ?
> << I am currently having a very strange feeling about Rebol, it is very
> powerful to use but the documentation seems insufficient to me on some
> points like those,
> which makes it quite painful to do even very simple things. >>
> I think a lot of people feel the same way. The problem stems from little
> holes, like the one you ran into, that prevent it from working
> transparently. When you have to dig in, there is often not a clear set of
> docs on how certain pieces work under the hood.
I do agree and as I said in my answer to Scott Jones (oops, sorry I don't know
which word is his first name ?) I think rebol would gain a much wider acceptance
in "open source language" developer circles if there was such documentation
available.
> How painful you find it is relative. :) Given any large, complex, software
> system of any kind, how easy is it to understand, modify, and extend? I
> always thought VB was easy to use, but I started with QB and lots of stuff
> just came with time and experience. Newcomers could be overwhelmed very
> easily by it. What about .NET or Java? Perl, Python, Ruby? Others? Are there
> missing pieces that will help make REBOL more accessible to "power
> newcomers" who dig in a bit and then hit these kinds of walls?
> I guess I'm saying that I agree but, like others here, I'm looking for where
> we get the most bang for our buck (i.e. ROI). REBOL is so different, in many
> ways, that I think sometimes it just takes time to get comfortable with its
> idioms and learns where the traps are. :)
Perhaps that writing the documentation that Reboltech failed to write is
the best way to increase your ROI by making sure that knowledge gained by
individual old timers can be transmitted to all other rebolers be they
themselves experts (in some other rebol domain) or beginners ;)
The list is of course a very good way to exchange ideas and comment rebol code
but I guess that you could all become tired as rebol will gain wider acceptance
and newbies will arrive on the list always asking the exact same type of
question everytime ;)
Many rebol related sites I visited offer part of the knowledge that you evocate
but perhaps would it be better if all their owners partnered to write "the
alternative rebol documentation".
It could take the form of a book (electronic), where G. Scott Jones could write
the chapter on protocols and handlers, Brett Handley could be responsible for
the view/vid chapter, Ladislav Mecir would take care of lower level interpreting
mecanims (if I understood what it wrote on his site ;)) and so on (random name
selection from some of the list recent active subjects).
Of course this is a beginner's dream, but perhaps it can be done ;)
Regards,
Laurent